Inside

Inside is a 2016 puzzle platformer that, on paper, should not stress a modern desktop. Yet the measured data for the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER combination reveals a fascinating story about where bottlenecks emerge when a high-end CPU meets a mid-range GPU from a previous generation. The benchmark results show a system capable of extraordinary frame rates, but the scaling between resolutions and settings exposes a clear division of labor between the processor and the graphics card.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X is a 12-core, 24-thread processor based on the Zen 4 Raphael architecture, built on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 4.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, which are exceptionally high frequencies for a chip with this many cores. The CPU’s cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 64 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration places it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs tested, with an average benchmark score of 53,288.

In synthetic tests, the 7900X shows a strong scaling curve from 2 to 16 threads. Its 3DMark scores progress from 2,137 for 2 threads, to 4,151 for 4 threads, 7,798 for 8 threads, and 10,972 for 16 threads, peaking at 12,536 for max threads. This indicates that the chip has ample headroom for heavily threaded workloads, though Inside is not a title that typically leverages more than a few cores. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29,300, compared to a single-core score of 2,016.5, further confirms the processor’s dual nature: it can throw massive multicore power at rendering tasks, but its single-thread performance, measured at 1,093 in 3DMark single-thread and 4,238 in PassMark single-thread, is what matters most for game logic and physics in a puzzle platformer.

The data suggests that the 7900X is almost certainly never the limiting factor in this game. At 1080p with Low settings, the system produces 281 FPS average. That frame rate is far beyond what the game’s visual complexity demands, and it implies the CPU is feeding frames as fast as the GPU can render them. The processor’s nearest rivals—the AMD EPYC 7313P (deltaPct 0.2), Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (deltaPct -0.3), Intel Xeon 634 (deltaPct 0.6), and Intel Core i7-14700F (deltaPct -0.6)—are all within a fraction of a percent of its average score, showing that this is a top-tier chip for any gaming scenario. For Inside, the 7900X’s 12 cores and 24 threads are overkill, but its high boost clock of 5.60 GHz ensures that the game’s single-threaded tasks are handled with minimal latency.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER is a Turing-architecture GPU built on a 12 nm process, featuring 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. Its base clock is 1470 MHz with a boost clock of 1650 MHz, and it contains 2,176 shading units, 136 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The card also includes 34 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, though these features are largely irrelevant for a 2D side-scrolling puzzle platformer like Inside. The GPU sits in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18,093.

In compute benchmarks, the RTX 2060 SUPER achieves a PassMark G3D score of 16,462 and a PassMark GPU Compute score of 6,721. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (deltaPct -0.4), AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (deltaPct -0.5), AMD Radeon RX 460 (deltaPct -1.5), and Intel Arc A770M (deltaPct -1.6). The fact that the 2060 SUPER is comparable to a mobile RTX 3060 and a low-end desktop RX 460 suggests that its performance class is solidly mid-range by modern standards, which is a significant mismatch for the flagship 7900X CPU.

This mismatch is evident in the measured frame rates. At 4K Ultra, the system averages 60 FPS, while at 4K Low, it jumps to 127 FPS. The GPU is clearly the component that dictates performance as resolution increases, because the CPU’s capabilities remain constant, yet the frame rates drop dramatically. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for Inside’s simple textures, but the GPU’s raw throughput is the ceiling at higher resolutions. The card’s boost clock of 1650 MHz is modest, and its 7.181 TFLOPS FP32 performance is not exceptional, which explains why the system cannot maintain high frame rates at 4K Ultra without dropping below the 60 FPS threshold.

FAQ — 4-6 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X CPU or the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER GPU the bottleneck in Inside?

A: The data indicates the GPU is the bottleneck at higher resolutions. At 1080p Low, the system hits 281 FPS, but at 4K Ultra it drops to 60 FPS. The CPU’s performance is consistent across all tests, while the GPU’s render load increases with resolution, causing the frame rate to plummet.

Q: How does the 7900X compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core i7-14700F?

A: The 7900X has an average benchmark score of 53,288, while the i7-14700F scores 53,620, resulting in a deltaPct of -0.6. This means the 7900X is only 0.6% slower on average, which is a negligible difference for gaming.

Q: What is the maximum frame rate achieved in Inside with this combo?

A: The highest average frame rate recorded is 281 FPS at 1920x1080 with Low settings. The minimum FPS for that configuration is not reported, but the Medium setting at 1080p shows a range of 191 to 259 FPS with an average of 225 FPS.

Q: Does the RTX 2060 SUPER outperform the AMD Radeon RX 460 in this system?

A: Yes. The RTX 2060 SUPER has an average GPU benchmark score of 18,093, while the RX 460 scores 18,373, giving the RX 460 a deltaPct of -1.5 relative to the 2060 SUPER. This means the 2060 SUPER is 1.5% slower than the RX 460 on average, which is surprising but within a margin of error.

Q: Can this combo maintain 60 FPS at 4K resolution?

A: At 4K with High settings, the system averages 63 FPS, which is above 60. However, at 4K Ultra, the average drops to 60 FPS exactly, and at 4K Medium it rises to 102 FPS. So, 60 FPS is achievable at 4K High, but not comfortably at Ultra.

Q: How many threads does the 7900X have, and does the game use them?

A: The 7900X has 24 threads. Inside is a puzzle platformer that likely does not utilize that many threads, as evidenced by the CPU’s 3DMark score scaling from 2,137 at 2 threads to 12,536 at max threads. The game’s frame rate is more dependent on the GPU at high settings.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combination of the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER ranks 2,556 out of 3,716 tested combos in Inside. This places it in the lower third of all system configurations, which is counterintuitive given the CPU’s top-tier status. The rank is likely dragged down by the GPU’s mid-range performance, as the 2060 SUPER is in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU is in the 91st percentile.

This rank suggests that many other combinations—likely those pairing a less powerful CPU with a more powerful GPU—achieve higher frame rates in this game. The data shows that Inside is not CPU-bound, so the 7900X’s 12 cores and 24 threads provide no tangible benefit over a cheaper processor. The system’s performance is entirely gated by the RTX 2060 SUPER’s ability to render frames, which means that any combo with a faster GPU would likely rank higher, even if it had a slower CPU. The 2,556th rank out of 3,716 indicates that this pairing is not optimized for this specific title, despite the CPU’s raw power.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured FPS data across resolutions reveals a clear pattern of GPU-bound scaling. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the system averages 281 FPS. Moving to 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 202 FPS, a reduction of 28.1%. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 127 FPS, a further reduction of 37.1% from 1440p. This steep decline as resolution increases is the classic signature of a GPU bottleneck, where the rendering workload grows quadratically with pixel count.

For High settings, the progression is similar but with lower absolute numbers: 141 FPS at 1080p, 101 FPS at 1440p (a 28.4% drop), and 63 FPS at 4K (a 37.6% drop from 1440p). The consistent percentage drop of roughly 28% from 1080p to 1440p, and 37% from 1440p to 4K, indicates that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s) are the limiting factors. The CPU’s performance remains constant, so the frame rate scaling is solely a function of the GPU’s workload. At 1080p, the system is likely CPU-bound or near-balanced, but by 4K, the GPU is clearly stretched to its limits, especially at Ultra settings where it hits exactly 60 FPS average.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

At 1920x1080, the system delivers its highest frame rates. Low settings produce an average of 281 FPS, Medium settings average 225 FPS with a minimum of 191 and maximum of 259, High settings average 141 FPS, and Ultra settings average 134 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 56 FPS, while the gap between High and Ultra is only 7 FPS, suggesting diminishing returns at the top end.

At 2560x1440, the frame rates drop significantly. Low settings average 202 FPS, Medium settings average 162 FPS with a range of 137 to 186, High settings average 101 FPS, and Ultra settings average 96 FPS. The difference between High and Ultra narrows to just 5 FPS, indicating that the GPU is becoming the primary constraint.

At 3840x2160, the results show the GPU’s limits. Low settings average 127 FPS, Medium settings average 102 FPS with a range of 86 to 117, High settings average 63 FPS, and Ultra settings average 60 FPS. The drop from High to Ultra is only 3 FPS, and both are near the 60 FPS threshold, meaning that visual fidelity gains at 4K come at the cost of frame rate stability. The Medium setting at 4K offers a comfortable 102 FPS average, which is the best balance of quality and speed at that resolution.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the optimal settings for this combo depend on the target resolution and desired frame rate. At 1920x1080, the Low preset yields 281 FPS, which is far beyond the refresh rate of most monitors, but the Medium preset at 225 FPS is a better choice for improved visuals without sacrificing smoothness. The High preset at 141 FPS is still excellent, but Ultra at 134 FPS offers only a 5% improvement over High, making High the more efficient choice for 1080p gaming.

At 2560x1440, the Medium preset provides 162 FPS, which is ideal for high-refresh-rate monitors. High at 101 FPS is playable but requires a 100 Hz display to fully utilize, while Ultra at 96 FPS is nearly identical to High and not worth the extra GPU load. The Low preset at 202 FPS is overkill, so Medium is the recommended balance.

At 3840x2160, the situation is more delicate. The High preset averages 63 FPS, which is just above the 60 FPS target, but it lacks a reported minimum FPS, suggesting potential dips below 60 during heavy scenes. The Medium preset averages 102 FPS with a minimum of 86 and maximum of 117, providing a much safer margin above 60 FPS. The Ultra preset at 60 FPS is too close to the edge for comfort, and Low at 127 FPS sacrifices too much visual quality. Therefore, for 4K, the Medium preset is the best experience, offering a smooth frame rate with a comfortable buffer above the minimum threshold.